<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: FDKUSER Transaction in Application Development and Automation Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486629#M1931719</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;ps: most likely your error is that you expect the person to confirm the change not to have the authorization to change the master data. So they are only an approver and the standard proposals suggest only the same. However it is a sensitive field confirmation where at least two users require both authorizations to change and confirm, but they must confirm each other's changes and then effectively create the record themselves and the checks are identical. Literally, the user names are hard-coded check values from the records.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cheers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Julius&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 20:50:31 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-02-15T20:50:31Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>FDKUSER Transaction</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486627#M1931717</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a user trying to confirm Vendor changes using FK08. SU53 states that they are missing FDKUSER.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am not sure that this is relevant, I cannot see why Internet User Maintenece would resolve this issue as we do not have Internet Users.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is this message hiding what they really need? We are using ECC6.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 17:27:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486627#M1931717</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-15T17:27:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FDKUSER Transaction</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486628#M1931718</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, it is the 2nd most famous "noise" after S_CTS_ADMI 'TABL' and before S_DEVELOP 'DEBUG'.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;See SAP Note 1671117 for the solution to "look behind the curtain" or eliminate the "single axis of evil"... &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cheers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Julius&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 20:45:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486628#M1931718</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-15T20:45:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FDKUSER Transaction</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486629#M1931719</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;ps: most likely your error is that you expect the person to confirm the change not to have the authorization to change the master data. So they are only an approver and the standard proposals suggest only the same. However it is a sensitive field confirmation where at least two users require both authorizations to change and confirm, but they must confirm each other's changes and then effectively create the record themselves and the checks are identical. Literally, the user names are hard-coded check values from the records.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cheers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Julius&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 20:50:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486629#M1931719</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-15T20:50:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FDKUSER Transaction</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486630#M1931720</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you Julius - this makes sense, even if it is a pain. Thank you for your help&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2016 08:53:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/fdkuser-transaction/m-p/11486630#M1931720</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-16T08:53:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

